Page images
PDF
EPUB

The portion of the existing station which will not be occupied by this modern highway is to be cleared and restored to its previous use as a park.

In planning for the naval station, the Navy envisioned the utilization of the existing Government-owned facilities, built up and improved by the Navy over the years, at the Naval Air Station, Anacostia.

Availability of certain existing facilities, minimum cost, distance from places of work at the Pentagon and Navy Annex for the majority of personnel involved, were several of the factors favorable to the selection of this site.

Estimates of cost for the nine line items in this project have been made on the basis of this initial plan, with consideration having been given to maximum use of existing facilities now in place.

Senator STENNIS. What is your estimated total cost now of your entire plan?

Admiral Chew. The total cost is about $25 million, sir; that is the total estimated cost. This increment would be $13,320,000, sir, which is a reduction, as I have given you, from the previous amount of $14,911,000.

This consists—would you prefer for me to go ahead with the line items in this particular increment, Mr. Chairman?

Senator STENNIS. Well, I do not know that it is necessary much to cover the line items. It is the whole concept of the thing that I was trying to get in my mind.

You said this morning there was a question here to taking care of 7,000 people, as I recall.

Admiral CHEW. Administrative services for 7,000. Actually living, there would be 3,500.

Senator STENNIS. 3,500; that is right.
Admiral CHEW. Yes, sir.

Senator STENNIS. What is a receiving station; is that where you receive your new men ?

Admiral Wilson. No, sir; that is a misnomer, really.
Admiral CHEW. It should be called a naval station.

Admiral WILSON. A naval station in that it provides the berthing and messing and the administrative chores necessary for the naval population on duty in the Washington area. We had previously changed, eliminated, the "receiving" out of the name long before this item came up. It is a naval station.

Senator STENNIS. Well, Admiral, here in a city that is already choked in and surrounded by a larger population than it has, how many Navy personnel do you have here in the city of Washington ? Are you going to feed 3,500, or take care of 3,500° down there; how many do you have in all, approximately?

Admiral WILSON. Approximately 7,000 is about right.

This, as I said this morning, is a consolidation of a lot of scattered properties we have, and by consolidating this all in this one area, we are then able to relinquish 258 acres of land that we are now using.

Senator STENNIS. Well, I do not know that it is necessary so much to cover the different items. There are $3 million here for a messhall. Do these people eat now?

Admiral Wilson. They are fed at the old station, at the foot of the bridge, sir, and this is the part that is all temporary construction and of high maintenance cost as a result of its being temporary and, as Admiral Chew said, we have got to give up a considerable portion of it in order to permit construction of this new 'highway which has been planned.

This is one of the things that adds to the urgency of the project.

Senator STENNIS. I do not know whether it is a suitable place to live down there or not. It seems to me it is right down there on the river, right at sea level, is it not?

Admiral Wilson. It is a little

Senator STENNIS. I mean for family housing. I do not know whether it would be suitable for a subdiviison of residences or not, but I just have a general feeling that the city needs some extra room.

Admiral WILSON. This particular portion, and that the Planning Commission and the Bureau of the Budget have approved, is the lowest part of the entire Anacostia area, so far as the elevation is concerned.

Senator STENNIS. Do you have a huge military installation out here at Belvoir; is that the one that is so large—the Army has it—and it would seem to me that there is space out there galore, and the people who work at these Government offices here in Washington, they cannot get in from down there, and it seems to me that you are just congesting more to have all your military personnel in there. If you could get out at Belvoir

Admiral WILSON. A large portion of these people are already down there, Senator.

As I said, in this old naval station, which this is replacing, they are already there; the traffic flow has been studied as a part of that plan and it is not a deterrent.

Senator STENNIS. I do not have any final or firm opinion on it. I was just feeling along. But I notice where you plan to put in a heliport.

I was on the subcommittee that considered the Anacostia and the Air Force, both being moved out, and air space was one of the main reasons to move them out. Now, you are going to put a heliport down there right next to the National Airport.

Admiral Chew. No, sir. As you know, Mr. Chairman, it was the fixed aircraft operations that were required to be moved, because of the interference with the traffic pattern at Washington National. The heliport is already there and will remain there, and if I may go off the record a minute

Senator STENNIS. Yes.
(Discussion off the record.)
Senator STENNIS. Back on the record.

I did not know there was any exception made. I thought the whole thing was to clear out and get the air space, which everybody agreed was dangerous.

I was on the Subcommittee on Appropriations that considered the Burke site, you know. · Admiral Chew. Yes, sir.

Senator STENNIS. We could not get a majority to vote for the Burke site. I would not vote for it because I thought they could get a better one, and finally they agreed on a better place, and this all came into the picture. · Admiral CHEW. You are correct, sir, on getting the fixed wing aircraft out of the area. But this is only for a ready operational group of about five helicopters on operational readiness, so it would not interfere in any way with the normal operations at National Airport, sir.

Senator STENNIS. Well, I have about decided it would have been better to let you stay there and moved the National Airport because we had to put all this extra money over at Andrews, and now we are asked to put all this money down back at Anacostia. I know, the Air Force—what did they have for Bolling? I am not critical of either one of them, but this thing has run into money, and we have been whipped on the legs by agreeing to so much for Andrews.

All right.
Is there anything else you want to say on that, Admiral ?

Admiral Chew. Nothing, except to reiterate the urgency of that, sir.

Senator STENNIS. All right, Admiral.

Admiral WILSON. One other thing: If the air station would have had to remain at Anacostia, it would not have changed the situation on this because we would have had to have the housing for the people because they were very badly housed; they are all scattered around the city.

Admiral CHEW. I might add one other thing—the consolidation of the barracks from Arlington Hall. Those are very substandard and should be torn down. That will allow that consolidation, since they will eventually have to be torn down anyhow because there are plans for the expansion of Shirley Highway accesses to go through that land.

So they would have to move in a very similar fashion to those that are housed at Anacostia.

Senator STENNIS. Well, frankly, it would seem to me that you would like to get away from town and that low land next to the riverget on out; get some money to make a new start somewhere.

All right. What is your next item?

COMMUNICATION FACILITIES

Admiral Chew. The next group of projects in our program, Mr. Chairman, is communication facilities. The group includes 23 line items at 15 stations for $20,868,000. Of these line items eight, for $8,550,000, are at seven stations in the United States. The remaining 15 line items for $12,318,000 are at eight oversea stations. Two of these oversea stations, with eight line items for $9,492,000, are at classified locations. These projects will be discussed in executive session during the hearing on section 202 of the bill.

The purpose of these activities is to provide reliable, secure, and rapid communication for control of the operating forces; to perform security functions; and to facilitate administration of the Naval Establishment.

284 MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION FISCAL YEAR 1961

MILITAR

CONSTRUC TION AUTHORIZATION FISC

AR

[ocr errors]

NAVAL RADIO STATION, CLAM LAGOON, ADAK,

ALASKA

Admiral CHEW. The first project is at the Naval Radio Station, Clam Lagoon, Adak, Alaska, for new radio receiver facilities at the estimated cost of $670,000.

Senator STENNIS. That is a part of what system now, Admiral Chew ?

Admiral CHEW. This is for the extension of a receiver building and antennas that we have there right at the present time.

Senator STENNIS. I know. What is that a part of? Your worldwide communications system?

Admiral Chew. It is a part of our communications to the fleet, as a naval requirement, sir.

Senator STENNIS. All right. Next item.
Senator ENGLE. May I ask a question on that?
Senator STENNIS. Yes.

Senator ENGLE. Not with reference to this particular matter, but I have two points:

No. 1, what effort is made by the Navy. to coordinate their communication network with that of the other services?

The Army was in here yesterday, and they had one with respect from here to the moon, and I saw a demonstration one day at the Pentagon by the Air Force that astonished me.

Does each one of the services maintain its own communications system?

Admiral CHEW. I think that can best be answered this way, Senator Engle: These facilities, generally speaking, are naval facilities for servicing the fleet and its associated elements.

In the point-to-point or worldwide system they have been thoroughly coordinated at the DOD level, with the Army and the Air Force, so that these are compatible communications.

There is not duplication in that field, sir.
Senator ENGLE. Now, the second question.
Admiral CHEW. Yes, sir.

Senator ENGLE. Are these communication facilities hardened to any degree? For instance, I am advised that a system is set up to communicate with undersea craft. Now, those could be knocked flatter than a flitter, and our communications with the fleet overseas, and especially the underwater fleet, would be out of operation. Is there any effort to harden them?

Admiral CHEW. There is no hardening of the communication facilities, but there are more than one-in other words, there would be two stations that would take care of an area, so that you would have reliability in case one station is knocked out, sir.

I think we are getting close to the classified area, sir.

Admiral WILSON. These things are parallel so that no one-the destruction of any one would not disrupt the system.

Senator ENGLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator STENNIS. Yes, sir; thank you. Senator Engle, you interrupt whenever you wish now on any project.

Senator ENGLE. I wanted to return at some appropriate moment to one item I wanted to ask about that the Secretary was on.

Senator STENNIS. All right. As soon as we finish this, we will return.

NAVAL RADIO STATION, ANNAPOLIS, MD. Admiral Chew. The second is page 54, sir-two line items at the Naval Radio Station, Annapolis, for a total of $795,000.

Senator STENNIS. Excuse me a minute. It is mighty hard for us to have any kind of informed opinion about any particular item here. May we ask, How will your answers apply to all of these installations that you have just given to Senator Engle? Do you find them all necessary? And, according to your approach, you could not get this service anywhere else? Is it a necessary part of your naval communications?

Admiral Chew. That is correct, Senator. They fall generally into two or three categories.

Senator STENNIS. Yes.

Admiral CHEW. One is to provide more reliable communications to our fleet. A second category is to improve certain security aspects and the collection of information. They all meet naval requirements and, as I stated to Senator Engle, they are coordinated on point-topoint aspects so there is no duplication of the other service facilities.

Senator STENNIS. Take, for instance, here an antenna, $645,000, on the next page, and you have“Antenna,” $390,000.

Well, Senator Engle may have an idea about what is a reasonable cost, but I certainly do not, and I doubt that he has had a chance to know.

Does that mean the construction of the setup and also the equipment or is that just the equipment?

Admiral Chew. This is for the entire construction, sir. Perhaps Admiral Peltier would like to talk to it.

Senator STENNIS. Admiral?

Admiral PELTIER. It is not the black boxes, Mr. Chairman. This is what we call a Wullenweber system, composed of poles, wires, and grounding system, and, if required, a building and its utilities.

Senator STENNIS. All right.

NAVAL RADIO STATION, CHELTENHAM, MD.

Admiral CHEW. The next project is at the Naval Radio Station, Cheltenham, Md., for construction of antennas at the estimated cost of $396,000. As the Annapolis station provides the transmitting facilities, this activity provides the receiver facilities for the Naval Communication Station, Washington, D.C. This project will provide for three high-gain directional receiving antennas and four ship-to-shore sector sleeve antennas necessary for improved communication in modern fleet operations. High-speed, high-volume, reliable, and secure communication between ships at sea in the Atlantic Ocean area and the Mediterranean Sea and shore-based commands are a prerequisite to the success of naval operations in this strategic area.

Senator STENNIS. Pages 54 and 55 are about the same, then, except the difference in costs? Do you want to say something about 56 especially, fleet broadcast facilities? What is that $2.5 million ?

54781—60-20

« PreviousContinue »